A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 3rd 09, 02:19 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
k
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens


"Sir John Howard" wrote in message
...
| C J Campbell wrote:
| On 2009-02-02 11:59:33 -0800, "Focus" said:
|
| http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg
|
| Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without
| filters, you can create this effect quite easily.
| Here's one tutorial:
|
|
http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/p...ftTutorial.htm
l
|
|
| If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny,
interesting
| pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some
miniature
| street or scene.
|
| This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
| lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
| Photoshop with a single image.
|
| A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
| controls depth of field.

i think he meant plane of focus

  #12  
Old February 3rd 09, 04:03 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
ASAAR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,057
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:24:33 +1100, Sir John Howard wrote:

This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
controls depth of field.


That's not entirely correct. Perspective can be manipulated with
shifts, but depth of field is controlled both by aperture and tilt.

[Page 20 of the 24mm PC-E Nikkor manual]
This is a retrofocus-type perspective control (PC) lens that lets you
emphasize or correct near and far perspective, or control depth of
field. It also lets you correct distortion caused by the camera angle.
Moreover, you can use the lens’ tilt and shift mechanism to achieve
focus of the entire subject plane when it is not parallel to the camera.


  #13  
Old February 3rd 09, 08:15 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Chris Malcolm[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,142
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Sir John Howard wrote:
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2009-02-02 11:59:33 -0800, "Focus" said:

http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg

Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without
filters, you can create this effect quite easily.
Here's one tutorial:

http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/p...tTutorial.html


If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny, interesting
pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some miniature
street or scene.


This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
controls depth of field.


Lens shift changes perspective. Lens tilt tilts the plane of
focus. This is a quite a different effect from aperture related depth
of field.

--
Chris Malcolm



  #14  
Old February 4th 09, 10:27 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,272
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said:

On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Mr.T [email protected] wrote:
"Sir John Howard" wrote in message
This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/s

hift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens apert

ure
controls depth of field.


Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute for a
full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow the
depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane.
And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone.


I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and
even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS
lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need.

--
Ray Fischer * * * *
*


There is software to handle the extended depth of field. You take a
series of pictures and merge them. Say you start by focusing 6 inches
out. Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focus
8 inches out. If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at
12" or so. You then merge the photos together and get one picture
with extended DOF. I've never used the software but I've read
articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy).

It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the images
to give a larger dynamic range.


Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that
you can merge them together.

After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixels
in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when
you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures?
Maybe the bride won't sit still?

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

  #15  
Old February 5th 09, 04:36 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,272
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

On 2009-02-04 15:39:05 -0800, Pat said:

On Feb 4, 5:27*pm, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said:



On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Mr.T [email protected] wrote:
"Sir John Howard" wrote in message
This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/

s
hift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that i

n
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens ape

rt
ure
controls depth of field.


Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute fo

r a
full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow

the
depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane.
And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone.


I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and
even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS
lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need.


--
Ray Fischer * * * *
*


There is software to handle the extended depth of field. *You take a
series of pictures and merge them. *Say you start by focusing 6 inche

s
out. *Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focu

s
8 inches out. *If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at
12" or so. *You then merge the photos together and get one picture
with extended DOF. *I've never used the software but I've read
articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy).


It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the images
to give a larger dynamic range.


Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that
you can merge them together.

After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixels
in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when
you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures?
Maybe the bride won't sit still?

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor


Actually, if you took 10 images where you did nothing except changed
the focus and you merge them together, you'd still have your original
resolution. You wouldn't be gaining any information, you'd just be
making sure that all of it was in focus.


I said nothing about changing focus.

As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

  #16  
Old February 6th 09, 01:05 AM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Mr.T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 889
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens


"C J Campbell" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)


I'll bet camera vibration will probably do that for you already :-)

MrT.


  #17  
Old February 6th 09, 04:58 AM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Ray Fischer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,136
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

Pat wrote:
On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Mr.T [email protected] wrote:
"Sir John Howard" wrote in message
This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture
controls depth of field.


Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute for a
full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow the
depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane.
And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone.


I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and
even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS
lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need.


There is software to handle the extended depth of field. You take a
series of pictures and merge them.


Ick.

Say you start by focusing 6 inches
out. Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focus
8 inches out. If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at
12" or so.


Which is okay if you have a tripod and a subject that isn't changing.
That is rarely the case for me.

--
Ray Fischer


  #18  
Old February 6th 09, 03:58 PM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
C J Campbell[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 689
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

On 2009-02-05 20:05:27 -0800, Pat said:

On Feb 5, 11:36*am, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2009-02-04 15:39:05 -0800, Pat said:



On Feb 4, 5:27*pm, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said

:

On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Mr.T [email protected] wrote:
"Sir John Howard" wrote in message
This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a til

t/
s
hift
lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that

i
n
Photoshop with a single image.


A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens a

pe
rt
ure
controls depth of field.


Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute

fo
r a
full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allo

w
the
depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane.
And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone.


I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and
even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, T

S
lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need.


--
Ray Fischer * * * *
*


There is software to handle the extended depth of field. *You take

a
series of pictures and merge them. *Say you start by focusing 6 inc

he
s
out. *Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and fo

cu
s
8 inches out. *If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is a

t
12" or so. *You then merge the photos together and get one picture
with extended DOF. *I've never used the software but I've read
articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy).


It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the image

s
to give a larger dynamic range.


Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that
you can merge them together.


After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixel

s
in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when
you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures

?
Maybe the bride won't sit still?


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor


Actually, if you took 10 images where you did nothing except changed
the focus and you merge them together, you'd still have your original
resolution. *You wouldn't be gaining any information, you'd just be
making sure that all of it was in focus.


I said nothing about changing focus.

As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor


I don't think you understood my 1st post re multiple exposures. You
take multiple exposures but don't move the camera -- just move the
focal point. That, obviously, changes what's in focus. My merging
the photos in much same way you would merge photos for a high-dynamic-
range photo; you can get a photo with a huge depth of field (which is
what the thread was about). It was not about merging to make a
panoramic or something.


No, Pat. We all know about this technique. I use it most often in macro shots.



--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

  #19  
Old February 7th 09, 01:02 AM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Mr.T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 889
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens


"John A." wrote in message
...
As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)


I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could
be firmware-hacked to do that.


No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by
accident :-)

MrT.


  #20  
Old February 7th 09, 10:57 AM posted to aus.photo,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Chris Malcolm[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,142
Default Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Mr.T [email protected] wrote:

"John A." wrote in message
...
As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left
a half a pixel for the second shot. :-)


I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could
be firmware-hacked to do that.


No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by
accident :-)


I don't know whether any of the current in-body stabilisers can
actually do it, but very similar technology has been employed for
decades now to adjust the position of slides in automated microscopy,
and that technology is certainly capable of well under half a pixel
adjustments.

--
Chris Malcolm



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon Telephoto Tilt-Shift TS-E EF 90mm f/2.8 Manual Focus Lens for Canon EOS Bodies cbgjr Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 0 October 24th 07 01:38 AM
Tilt-Shift Lens: Any Experiences? Annika1980 35mm Photo Equipment 44 April 9th 06 06:59 PM
No need for a tilt shift lens. Scott W Digital Photography 48 November 2nd 05 04:06 AM
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens clive Digital Photography 13 October 25th 04 12:29 AM
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens clive 35mm Photo Equipment 14 October 25th 04 12:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.